Yeah , well from what i can see there's no reason to keep using Awesomium instead of this. I could be wrong but i think node-webkit can replace awesomium entirelly. I can point some advantages:

- FOSS (Free Open Source)- Blazing fast to start- Lightweight- Much faster updates / synch with latest webkit tech- No need to deal with C++ , very easy to setup etc.- Big plus: Full power of node.JS so you have full local disk access , so you can make editors with it, open and save file dialogs etc. And on top of that you can access native functions via C++ plugins.

I can say because i'm already using it.

And so on. I think it's safe to at least try it and compare it side by side with Awesomium :)Kiyoshi2012-11-13 17:07:21

I've exported to node-webit. All I did was export to HTML5 then follow the node-webkit documentation from there to get it running. Note this method I not supported and will be missing features unless added by the Scirra team.

Not at all. Awesomium is very much an active project and used in a number of projects and even AAA games: Everquest 2, Tribes Ascend, Overgrowth and I'm not positive but the browser technology for Stream might be implemented with Awesomium.

The problem with Awesomium is that it was intended as a way to put a browser in a game or solution; not necessarily being a wrapper for a browser type game. Whereas when running in a game it's usually some sort of UI or webpage; which tends to run just as well with an older version of chromium as well as the most recent. This is how the Awesomium team can afford to work on a much longer development cycle with older versions of chrome.basspenguin2012-12-07 04:28:46